gathering had been advertised as the "SDS National War Council" beforehand). This decision reflected the splintering of SDS into hostile rival factions. Rather than try to rebuild SDS from underground, the WUO decided to abandon it altogether. Rudd would call the dissolution of SDS, "[T]he single greatest mistake… of my life… It was a historical crime." Because of the difficulties in recruiting from underground, and the decision to dissolve SDS, the WUO effectively limited the size and growth potential of the organization. Speeches During the course of the War Council, several of the leading members of the WUO gave impassioned speeches designed, as Judy Siff later said, to "really psych [the group] up." Some of these speeches would become very controversial. Mark Rudd gave a speech in which he described himself as a "monomaniacal" "Captain Ahab" set out to kill "the white whale of imperialism," and speculated that killing a "pig" or blowing up a building would be a "really wonderful feeling." In her speech, Bernardine Dohrn praised the actions of the Manson family (although she would later claim that the speech was meant to be satirical), saying, "Dig it; first they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the room with them, then they even shoved a fork into pig Tate's stomach. Wild!" Holding up four fingers (symbolizing the fork) became the WUO's salute during the War Council. Historical Perspectives The Flint War Council has been controversial with historians and former WUO members because of some of the statements made during the event. Even during the event, according to a reporter present, many of the speeches delivered at the War Council "stunned" those who were not part of the WUO. Former members of the WUO have had similar reactions when looking back on the events at the War Council. Jeff Jones later called the speeches an example of "group psychosis," and Mark Rudd described them as "madness." Susan Stern called the speeches praising Manson, "[T]he last putrid drop of American poison" in the WUO. Cathy Wilkerson said that, although some may have seen the events of the War Council as theatre, to her the sentiments expressed were "deadly serious." Historians' evaluations of the War Council have also differed. Dan Berger calls the War Council a "[S]pectacle… an expression of outrage, but one whose hyperbole was self-evident." Jeremy Varon says, [A]n air of unreality hung over the Weatherman's menacing